Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Dov Feldstern wrote:
John Levon wrote:
On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 06:37:05AM +0300, Martin Vermeer wrote:
If what Martin means is that *LyX* will have no ambiguity, e.g,
when generating latex/XML, then I think that the disambiguation
algorithm suggested in this thread
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel/95997 (plus the
refinement suggested by JMarc, which uses the extent of the ranges,
see the whole thread) would solve any ambiguities that might arise
with ranges; hence, this is not an advantage relative to ranges.
Doesn't exist yet, and doesn't sound simple.
It's also pretty self-contained. Sometimes we must take the hit of some
slightly more complicated code for a better UI experience.
Self-contained also means better maintainability, because there are
less chances of someone breaking the whole mechanism by playing with
some seemingly unrelated piece of code. I'd much rather have a
self-contained but complicated piece of code (if the interface is well
defined and I can trust that it works), than simpler code spread out
all over the place.
You've just made a plea for charstyle as inset: fonts are spread all
over the place whereas insets are self contained.
If we're talking about changing cursor movement so that it has complex
interactions with insets, that's fragile.
But yes, I guess that in either case there would have to be complex
interactions somewhere... ;)
:-P
Abdel.
